But I think it's factually true that for purposes of purchasing happiness, status, lack-of-suffering, preference-satisfaction or most other metrics I can think of that matter to individual people, people are likely to value a dollar more highly if they have fewer of them.

And you just switched back from context #2 to context #1.

This is, frankly, frustrating my hope of a dialogue here. Do you recognize, at least, that you have done this? (Changed contexts / rephrasings)?

You can't discuss "what does this say of my value as a person" in terms of "how useful is this?"

Value ethics are not utility ethics.